Quantum Cryptography, Post-Quantum Cryptography and the Future of Digital Investigation

1. Executive Summary

Quantum computing is progressing toward capabilities that will fundamentally alter the global cybersecurity landscape. Once a cryptographically relevant quantum computer becomes available, today’s public-key cryptography—particularly RSA and elliptic-curve systems—could be broken in hours or days, rather than billions of years. Because these algorithms underpin digital identities, secure communications, authentication, and the protection of long-lived personal and national-security information, the emergence of quantum-enabled threats represents one of the most profound shifts in the history of cyber defence.

In anticipation of this shift, governments and standards bodies have accelerated the development and adoption of post-quantum cryptography (PQC). The publication of the first NIST PQC standards in 2024 marks a critical milestone. These new algorithms—designed to remain secure against both classical and quantum attacks—will become the foundation of future digital trust. The UK, US and EU have already established migration timelines extending to the mid-2030s, and organisations must prepare for a multi-year transition affecting every cryptographic system in their estates.

For individuals, this transition is essential to protect lifelong digital records from “harvest-now, decrypt-later” attacks. For businesses and critical infrastructure operators, PQC requires re-architecting systems, updating operational technology and engaging with supply chains. For governments, it involves safeguarding national assets, steering regulatory expectations and ensuring that justice systems remain evidence-sound in the quantum era. For digital investigators, quantum computing introduces temporary opportunities, lasting challenges and the need for a new class of quantum-aware forensic capabilities.

This briefing provides a deep exploration of quantum cryptography, PQC, plausible timelines for quantum capability emergence, and their implications for society. It also assesses the likely impact on digital investigations and presents strategic recommendations for leaders preparing to secure their organisations—and their evidence—against the coming quantum paradigm.

2. Key Concepts: Quantum Computing, Quantum Cryptography and PQC

2.1 Quantum Computing

Quantum computing harnesses quantum-mechanical principles—superposition, entanglement and interference—to process information in fundamentally different ways from classical computers. Instead of operating on bits that represent 0 or 1, quantum computers use qubits that can represent many states simultaneously. This enables quantum algorithms to evaluate a vast number of possibilities in parallel, providing a dramatic efficiency advantage for certain classes of mathematical problems.

The problems most vulnerable to quantum acceleration are those that modern public-key cryptography relies upon. Shor’s algorithm, for example, can factor large integers and compute discrete logarithms exponentially faster than classical algorithms, placing RSA, Diffie-Hellman and elliptic-curve cryptography at direct risk. While today’s quantum computers are not yet capable of executing Shor’s algorithm at cryptographically relevant scales, global research and investment indicate a clear trajectory toward this capability.

2.2 How Today’s Cryptography Breaks

Modern digital security depends on a combination of symmetric encryption, public-key cryptography and cryptographic hashing. Symmetric encryption—used for bulk data protection—remains relatively secure against quantum attack, provided key lengths are sufficiently large. However, public-key cryptography is far more vulnerable. RSA and ECC depend on mathematical problems that, while infeasible for classical computers to solve, could become tractable for a sufficiently powerful quantum machine.

The implications of this vulnerability are wide-ranging. Public-key cryptography secures web traffic, virtual private networks, software updates, digital signatures, authentication flows and the entire public-key infrastructure (PKI). If quantum computers can break these systems, they could impersonate legitimate services, decrypt sensitive communications and forge signatures—undermining the global foundation of digital trust.

2.3 Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC)

Post-quantum cryptography refers to classical cryptographic algorithms that are believed to be resistant to attacks from both quantum and non-quantum computers. These algorithms rely on hard mathematical problems—often lattice-based or hash-based—that do not exhibit the same vulnerabilities exploited by quantum algorithms such as Shor’s. PQC does not require quantum hardware to implement; instead, it is designed to slot into existing digital architectures, replacing or augmenting traditional public-key systems.

In 2024, NIST published the first three PQC standards: ML-KEM, a lattice-based key-establishment mechanism; ML-DSA, a lattice-based digital signature scheme; and SLH-DSA, a hash-based signature algorithm. These standards represent a foundational shift in global cryptography. Over the next decade, they will be integrated into protocols such as TLS, VPN frameworks, secure email standards, code-signing infrastructures, identity systems and embedded platforms across critical infrastructure.

2.4 Quantum Cryptography

Quantum cryptography is distinct from PQC. Rather than relying on mathematical hardness assumptions, quantum cryptography leverages the physical properties of quantum systems to provide security guarantees. The most mature example is quantum key distribution (QKD), which allows two parties to generate shared cryptographic keys over an optical link in a way that reveals any attempt at eavesdropping. While QKD offers exceptionally strong security under certain conditions, it has practical limitations.

Because QKD requires specialised hardware, controlled optical channels and trusted endpoints, it is likely to remain a niche technology reserved for ultra-high-assurance environments such as inter-data-centre links, defence communications or central bank networks. It will not replace public-key cryptography for general-purpose use. Instead, quantum cryptography and PQC will coexist, each serving distinct roles within a broader quantum-resilient security landscape.

3. Timelines: When Does This Really Bite?

3.1 Where Quantum Computing Stands Today

Quantum computing remains in what researchers describe as the Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum (NISQ) era. The most advanced publicly disclosed quantum processors now exceed a thousand physical qubits, marking significant scientific progress. Yet these qubits suffer from short coherence times, operational errors and architectural constraints that prevent them from performing deep, complex circuits at scale. To run Shor’s algorithm against a 2,048-bit RSA key, billions of high-quality operations must be executed without collapse or corruption—something no current quantum machine can approach.

The path to a cryptographically relevant quantum computer lies in achieving stable, error-corrected logical qubits. Error correction requires thousands of physical qubits to support a single logical one, meaning that breaking RSA-2048 could require tens of thousands of logical qubits backed by millions of physical qubits. Although this level of capability remains out of reach, global investment, research breakthroughs and quantum-hardware roadmaps point toward sustained progress throughout the next decade.

3.2 When a Cryptographically Relevant Quantum Computer Might Emerge

Forecasting the exact arrival date of a cryptographically relevant quantum computer is impossible, but experts generally agree on a probabilistic window. In the near term—within five years—it is highly unlikely that quantum computers will reach the scale and stability required to threaten real-world cryptographic systems. Hardware is simply not yet capable of supporting the depth, fidelity or logical-qubit density needed for large-scale cryptanalytic attacks.

Beyond this immediate horizon, uncertainty increases. Many assessments converge on a plausible window of five to fifteen years during which more advanced error-corrected architectures could emerge. Looking further ahead, the 2035–2045 timeframe is widely regarded as the period in which cryptographically relevant quantum computing becomes probable, assuming current research and investment trajectories continue. For cybersecurity planning, this means that quantum-resilient cryptographic systems must be deployed well before a mature quantum threat materialises.

3.3 Government and Commercial Migration Timelines

Governments have adopted migration timelines that reflect the uncertainty surrounding quantum-capable adversaries while preparing national infrastructure for the future. These timelines are not predictions of when quantum computers will emerge, but safeguards ensuring that critical systems are protected when they do. The UK National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) expects major organisations to complete cryptographic discovery by 2028, mature migration planning by 2031 and substantial PQC adoption by 2035. The US National Security Agency (NSA) outlines comparable expectations in its CNSA 2.0 guidance for national security systems.

Commercial organisations face a dual challenge: migrating their own systems while also depending on vendors and supply-chain partners to implement PQC within commercial products and platforms. Cloud providers, operating system vendors, security tool suppliers and telecommunications companies will progressively build PQC into their offerings. However, businesses must still assess long-lived devices, bespoke applications and operational-technology environments that may not receive automatic updates. This makes cryptographic inventorying and risk prioritisation essential.

3.4 The Harvest-Now, Decrypt-Later Threat

The most immediate aspect of the quantum threat is the phenomenon known as harvest-now, decrypt-later (HNDL). Adversaries do not need a quantum computer to begin exploiting quantum risk. They can capture encrypted communications today—such as VPN tunnels, TLS traffic, government correspondence and intellectual property—store it cheaply and decrypt it in the future when quantum capabilities mature. This approach is particularly concerning for long-lived sensitive data, including medical records, government archives, defence communications and financial datasets.

Because many types of high-value information retain strategic, operational or personal importance for decades, the quantum threat is effectively present now. Ensuring long-term confidentiality requires proactive migration to quantum-resilient systems. Organisations that delay PQC adoption risk exposing years of historic communications to future decryption, making urgent planning essential even though practical quantum attacks have not yet materialised.

4. What This Means for the Future of Cryptography

4.1 From Fixed Cryptography to Crypto-Agility

Historically, cryptography has been treated as a foundational technology set once and left unchanged for years. Organisations deployed cryptographic libraries, protocols and hardware with the expectation that the underlying algorithms would remain secure throughout their lifecycle. The quantum threat upends this assumption entirely. As PQC begins replacing classical public-key cryptography, organisations must adopt a new operational model in which cryptographic components are expected to evolve multiple times within a single system’s lifespan.

The transition will unfold in stages. In the first stage, hybrid modes will dominate, combining PQC and classical algorithms to maintain backward compatibility and enable gradual testing. Over time, PQC-first configurations will become standard, and eventually systems will be designed with crypto-agility at their core. Crypto-agility allows algorithms to be swapped without architectural redesign, ensuring long-term resilience against emerging cryptographic vulnerabilities—quantum or otherwise.

4.2 The Role of Quantum Cryptography in Future Security Architectures

While PQC provides a practical, scalable solution for the vast majority of digital services, quantum cryptography will remain an important tool for high-assurance environments. QKD, in particular, offers mathematically and physically robust protection against eavesdropping. However, its reliance on specialised infrastructure, controlled channels and trusted endpoints limits its applicability. QKD cannot replace the wide range of functions currently served by public-key cryptography, including authentication, signatures and long-distance, multi-hop communications.

Instead, future security architectures will integrate both approaches where appropriate. PQC will underpin general-purpose cryptographic functions, while quantum cryptography will secure a narrow set of ultra-critical communication links. Together, these technologies will form part of a layered, quantum-resilient defence model that blends classical, quantum and post-quantum techniques to protect digital systems for decades to come.

5. Implications for Individuals, Organisations and Governments

5.1 Individuals and Consumers

For most individuals, the transition to quantum-resilient security will take place behind the scenes. Consumers will not directly notice the introduction of post-quantum algorithms into their smartphones, laptops, online services or cloud applications. Yet the impact will be profound. Personal data—ranging from medical records and financial histories to biometric identifiers and private communications—often has a lifespan measured in decades. If this information is intercepted today under classical encryption, it may be decrypted in the future unless protected by post-quantum cryptography.

Consumers also rely heavily on encrypted services for safety and trust. Messaging platforms, ecommerce transactions, government portals, online banking and identity services all depend on cryptographic systems. As these services transition to PQC, users may encounter authentication changes, updated security prompts or new privacy features, but the largest shift will remain invisible. Over time, consumers will benefit from stronger privacy guarantees, greater protection against identity theft and improved resilience against sophisticated threat actors. However, unmanaged or poorly executed migrations risk disrupting access or reducing the security of legacy devices, particularly older IoT products that may never receive necessary updates.

These dynamics illustrate the importance of transparent communication from service providers and device manufacturers. Individuals must know whether their devices will continue receiving updates, whether privacy guarantees remain intact and whether sensitive data—especially long-lived records—is protected against future quantum threats. Without proactive industry action, consumers may unknowingly face long-term vulnerabilities that cannot be corrected retroactively.

5.2 Businesses and Critical National Infrastructure (CNI)

Businesses and critical national infrastructure operators face some of the greatest challenges in the quantum transition. Modern enterprises operate vast, interconnected infrastructures consisting of cloud services, on-premises networks, operational technology, embedded systems and legacy applications. Cryptography is used pervasively across these environments, yet many organisations lack a comprehensive understanding of where cryptographic functions reside, what algorithms are used and how they are managed. This makes PQC migration not just a technical challenge but a governance and operational one.

A significant concern for CNI operators is the presence of long-lived operational technology systems and embedded devices that cannot easily be updated or replaced. Industrial control systems, smart meters, medical devices, transportation networks and energy infrastructure often operate for decades. If these systems embed classical cryptography at the hardware level, retrofitting PQC may be technically or economically prohibitive. This creates a structural vulnerability that must be mitigated through compensating controls, architectural redesign or eventual phased replacement.

Common challenges for organisations include:

Lack of cryptographic visibility: Many organisations do not have a complete inventory of where cryptography is used, making it difficult to prioritise migration and assess risk.
Legacy systems and OT constraints: Devices designed before the quantum threat was widely recognised may not support new algorithms or the larger key sizes associated with PQC.
Supply-chain dependencies: Vendors must update their products, libraries and firmware before organisations can implement PQC safely and at scale.
Skills shortages: PQC, lattice cryptography, hybrid modes and quantum resilience require expertise that many organisations currently lack.

The business implications extend beyond security. PQC migration affects procurement processes, vendor contracts, regulatory compliance, digital transformation strategies and long-term data governance. Organisations that plan early will be able to adopt PQC with minimal disruption. Those that delay may face costly emergency overhauls, increased exposure to quantum-enabled attacks and operational challenges caused by rushed or fragmented migrations.

5.3 Governments and Public-Sector Organisations

Governments occupy a unique position in the quantum transition. They must secure their own national infrastructure—much of which supports defence, intelligence, healthcare, taxation and critical services—while also guiding and regulating the broader economy. Government agencies manage some of the world’s most sensitive and long-lived data, making them prime targets for harvest-now, decrypt-later attacks. A delay in implementing PQC could expose entire generations of public records to future compromise.

Public-sector systems also face additional constraints: budget cycles, procurement regulations, legacy technologies, multi-agency coordination challenges and complex programme-governance requirements. Without a structured national approach, PQC migration may proceed inconsistently across departments, creating systemic vulnerabilities. Regulatory bodies must also decide how and when to impose PQC requirements on CNI operators, financial institutions, telecommunications providers and healthcare systems.

Key responsibilities for governments and regulators include:

Setting sector-specific timelines: Clear guidance is needed to ensure that organisations migrate in a coordinated and timely manner consistent with national risk appetite.
Supporting discovery and capability-building: Funding, training and public–private partnerships can help organisations overcome technical and resource limitations.
Securing justice and evidence systems: Courts, law-enforcement platforms and evidential repositories must remain trustworthy as cryptographic algorithms evolve.
Leading by example: Governments must transition their own systems to PQC to maintain credibility and national resilience.

A coherent national PQC strategy is essential to avoid fragmentation and ensure that quantum resilience becomes an integrated feature of government operations, public services and national security capabilities.

6. Implications for Digital Investigations and DFIR

6.1 Access to Encrypted and Protected Data

Quantum computing will reshape the context in which digital investigators operate. In the short term, quantum capability may create a temporary window during which historic encrypted data—captured under classical public-key encryption—becomes newly accessible. This could provide valuable intelligence for law-enforcement agencies looking to analyse previously impenetrable archives of criminal communications, financial transactions or exfiltrated corporate data.

However, this window will close as PQC algorithms are fully deployed. Once quantum-resistant protocols become ubiquitous, attempts to decrypt protected data without lawful access mechanisms will again become unfeasible. In parallel, criminals and sophisticated threat actors may accelerate adoption of PQC for their own operational security, limiting investigative leverage. The shift to PQC therefore represents both an opportunity and a challenge for investigative teams.

6.2 Integrity, Authenticity and Chain of Custody

Digital evidence is only valuable if it can be proven authentic, unaltered and admissible in court. Classical digital signatures and certificates used in logging systems, case-management tools, emails and warrants may become vulnerable once quantum capabilities mature. If these signatures can be forged or if hash functions become insufficiently secure, the integrity of historical evidence may be questioned.

To mitigate these risks, investigators and law-enforcement agencies must begin resealing critical evidence artefacts using PQC signature schemes and trusted timestamping services. This includes forensic images, logs, chain-of-custody documentation and judicial records. Without proactive re-signing, courts may be unable to validate evidence collected today once classical signature schemes are deprecated. Ensuring continuity of trust will require close coordination between police forces, forensic laboratories, courts and national cybersecurity authorities.

6.3 New Investigative Artefacts and Quantum-Aware Forensics

As organisations integrate PQC and experimental quantum technologies, investigators will encounter new classes of artefacts that require updated methodologies. PQC-enabled protocols—such as updated versions of TLS, VPNs and secure email standards—will generate handshake data and metadata that must be captured and analysed correctly. Certificates, keys and logs will use different formats, larger key sizes and unfamiliar mathematical structures.

In high-assurance environments, quantum key-distribution appliances may introduce novel forms of telemetry, configuration files and operational logs. Additionally, quantum-cloud services will become targets of interest: investigators may need to analyse job submissions, execution traces and billing metadata to attribute quantum-assisted attacks or decryption attempts. These developments necessitate the evolution of forensic tooling, training and investigative practice.

6.4 Tooling and Skills Requirements

Most existing forensic tools assume classical cryptographic primitives and certificate formats. As PQC becomes mainstream, forensic suites must be updated to parse PQC signatures, validate PQC certificates, accommodate larger key sizes and recognise hybrid cryptographic handshakes. This requires collaboration between forensic-software vendors, cryptographic researchers and national laboratories to ensure that investigative tools remain capable and trusted.

Investigators themselves must also adapt. Quantum-aware investigative capability will require foundational understanding of PQC algorithms, cryptographic negotiation processes, quantum-enabled attack vectors and the forensic artefacts produced by PQC-enabled environments. Law-enforcement agencies should therefore invest in training programmes, cross-disciplinary research initiatives and collaboration with academic institutions specialising in quantum security and post-quantum forensic science.

7. Recommendations

7.1 For CISOs and Security Architects

Chief Information Security Officers will play a central role in orchestrating PQC migration. This effort should be viewed not as a minor technical upgrade but as a strategic transformation affecting governance, supply-chain relationships, operational processes and risk management. Clear leadership, structured planning and cross-organisational engagement are essential to avoid fragmented or incomplete adoption.

Organisations should begin by establishing cryptographic governance frameworks that assign responsibility for cryptographic oversight. A comprehensive cryptographic inventory must be developed to map algorithms, protocols, certificates and systems. This enables prioritised decision-making based on data sensitivity, system criticality and long-term confidentiality requirements. CISOs should work closely with enterprise architects and suppliers to ensure that new systems are designed for crypto-agility, allowing future algorithm changes without disruptive redesign.

Recommended actions include:

Implement enterprise-wide cryptographic governance: Define ownership, policies and lifecycle management processes for all cryptographic assets.
Conduct cryptographic discovery: Identify where cryptography is used, what data it protects and what risks arise from delayed migration.
Align with national migration timelines: Ensure organisational plans conform to UK NCSC, US CNSA 2.0 and relevant European guidance.
Develop crypto-agile architectures: Use pluggable cryptographic modules and avoid hard-coding algorithms into systems and devices.
Manage supplier dependencies: Require vendors to publish PQC roadmaps and provide hybrid-mode support during transition.

By embedding crypto-agility into enterprise design, CISOs ensure that organisations remain resilient not only to quantum threats but also to future cryptographic vulnerabilities unrelated to quantum computing. The organisations that invest early will be better positioned to accommodate new standards, address emergent risks and satisfy regulatory expectations.

7.2 For Digital Investigators and DFIR Leaders

Digital-forensic and incident-response professionals must prepare for a future in which quantum technologies alter both the threat landscape and the nature of digital evidence. The transition to PQC will change the cryptographic artefacts that investigators encounter and the methods needed to verify authenticity, interpret logs and preserve evidence. Without proactive preparation, investigative capabilities may degrade, and evidential integrity may be put at risk.

DFIR teams should work closely with cryptographers, security architects and legal authorities to ensure that evidential systems, logging platforms and forensic repositories transition to quantum-resilient security. Training should be expanded to include PQC fundamentals, quantum-aware threat models and the forensic implications of hybrid cryptographic environments. Early investment in tools, skills and procedures will ensure investigative continuity throughout and beyond the quantum transition.

Recommended actions include:

Implement quantum-safe evidence preservation: Reseal forensic images, logs and chain-of-custody documents using PQC signatures and trusted timestamping.
Update investigative playbooks: Incorporate PQC-aware triage steps, handshake capture and artefact analysis into standard operating procedures.
Upgrade forensic tooling: Ensure that forensic suites support PQC certificates, larger key sizes and hybrid cryptographic formats.
Develop specialist skills: Train investigators and analysts in PQC, quantum threat models and quantum-era artefact handling.

By acting now, DFIR teams can ensure that justice processes remain robust and that investigative operations retain their effectiveness in a world increasingly shaped by quantum technologies. This preparation will also strengthen overall forensic maturity, even in non-quantum-related cases.

7.3 For Policymakers and Regulators

Policymakers must ensure that national infrastructure, public services and critical sectors transition to PQC in a coordinated, timely and secure manner. Fragmented adoption or unclear expectations could leave systemic vulnerabilities across sectors that depend heavily on cryptographic assurance. Regulatory clarity, targeted funding and cross-sector collaboration are therefore essential components of national quantum-resilience strategies.

Governments should develop sector-specific guidance aligned to national timelines and international standards. They should also support discovery, training and capability-building initiatives to help organisations overcome technical and resource barriers. Importantly, policymakers must ensure that justice systems—including court technology, digital-evidence platforms and evidential archives—are secured well before classical algorithms are deprecated.

Recommended actions include:

Set clear national PQC expectations: Translate high-level timelines into actionable requirements for regulated sectors, including CNI, finance and healthcare.
Support capability-building: Fund cryptographic discovery programmes, academic research and workforce training in PQC and quantum security.
Protect justice systems: Prioritise PQC transition for law-enforcement, court IT systems and evidential repositories with long retention periods.
Promote collaboration: Establish multi-sector forums to share lessons, harmonise standards and avoid duplicating effort.

Effective policy and regulatory frameworks will ensure that the transition to quantum-resilient security enhances national resilience and protects public trust in digital systems. Countries that move decisively will also gain strategic advantage in setting international norms and standards.

8. Conclusions

Quantum computing represents a transformational challenge to the cryptographic systems that secure modern society. Although cryptographically relevant quantum computers are not yet available, evidence suggests they may emerge within the operational lifetime of many systems currently in use. Because cryptographic migration requires extensive planning, long-term investment and close coordination across sectors, organisations must act now to prepare for the coming transition.

Post-quantum cryptography offers a practical and scalable pathway to quantum resilience, while quantum cryptography provides additional security capabilities for specialised environments. Together, these technologies will define the cryptographic foundations of the next digital era. For digital investigators, the quantum transition demands early adaptation to protect evidential integrity, maintain investigative capability and ensure that justice systems remain trustworthy.

Ultimately, the quantum era will reward those who plan ahead. Proactive migration to PQC, investment in crypto-agility, updated forensic capabilities and strong national governance will ensure that society remains secure in the face of emerging quantum threats and continues to benefit from digital innovation without compromising long-term trust.

References

Cambridge Consultants & Capgemini Invent (2025) Regulator and Industry Perspectives on the Current Plan for PQC Transition. Report for the UK Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT).

National Cyber Security Centre (2023) Next Steps in Preparing for Post-Quantum Cryptography. NCSC, London.

National Cyber Security Centre (2024) Timelines for Migration to Post-Quantum Cryptography. NCSC, London.

National Institute of Standards and Technology (2024) What is Post-Quantum Cryptography? NIST PQC Project Overview.

National Institute of Standards and Technology (2024) FIPS 203: ML-KEM – Module-Lattice-Based Key-Encapsulation Mechanism. NIST, Gaithersburg, MD.

National Institute of Standards and Technology (2024) FIPS 204: ML-DSA – Module-Lattice-Based Digital Signature Algorithm. NIST, Gaithersburg, MD.

National Institute of Standards and Technology (2024) FIPS 205: SLH-DSA – Stateless Hash-Based Digital Signature Algorithm. NIST, Gaithersburg, MD.

National Security Agency (2022) Commercial National Security Algorithm Suite 2.0 (CNSA 2.0). NSA, Fort Meade, MD.

Mosca, M. (2018) ‘Cybersecurity in an Era with Quantum Computers: Will We Be Ready?’, IEEE Security & Privacy, 16(5), pp. 38–41.

Additional sources include current academic and industry literature on quantum computing roadmaps, harvest-now-decrypt-later threats and quantum-resilient digital forensics practice.

Tags: Quantum Cryptography, Post-Quantum Cryptography, PQC Migration, DFIR, Digital Forensics, National Cyber Security, Cryptographic Resilience, Quantum Computing

Share this briefing: